Difficulties in debating Islam

[Tao_Equus]

I have recently been researching on the topic of Muhammads' life and the origins of Islam. I find myself with many questions I would like to debate but find that I am reluctant and unsure how to go about this without offending Muslims. Do others here feel this same 'intimidation', for thats what I feel it to be, and find like me that this is unique to Islam?

[wil]

It seems often that debate v. discussion tends to offend.

I mean if you honor and respect someone elses belief but wish to discuss the intracies, the origin, or some issues...I think most are open to that...

Seems all religions have thier issues...I can't come to grips with some of the thought regarding infidels...but also have issues with the talmud on gentiles...but me thinks that I need to work on my log as well...

[brucegdc]

I think you've hit it there, wil - debate is challenging... discussion is respectful . For an example from another area, engaging a Christian in a debate about the divinity of Jesus will generally be confrontational - (well, unless the divinity question isn't a core belief of theirs) and you'll usually get a negative reaction. The items you mention, Tao, are core to Islamic belief, and thus get negative reactions when challenged.

[Tao_Equus]

Well the questions I have I would not hesitate to post to a Christian, a Jew, a Jannist or any other religeon. But I just know as soon as I were to post the same it would not be recieved well at all. I would immediately be condemned as anti-Islamic, of have another agenda other than an honest discussion. That this is unique to Islam strikes me as though we are all having to be way beyond respectful, which of course we should be, but infact we have to handle Islamic issues with oven gloves on. This strikes me as wrong.
Most of you will know I am an athiest, I have no agenda to push, yet I remain captivated by the origins, history and nuances of all faiths. Its just sad that I feel unable to engage in some questions I have, and I note that no-one else has risked the same, so I am unable to get anything that way. It's almost like CR is a corridor of doors, each leading to a faith, but the door marked Islam is securely locked and surrounded by balls of razor-wire. Its so much a reflection of the times I supose.



I should maybe have used the word discuss and not debate, there is a difference. but would there be a difference once a question was asked? I have no need or urge to proselityse for any camp including my own flavour of atheism. But in discussion with people you can get insights that are not found any other way.



david

[wil]

Again it appears with anything, discussing nuances and intracies of something we have common ground on is one thing...

But if one percieves that your questions or discussions are digging at the foundations of their faith that is quite another..

[aburaees]

Originally Posted by Tao_Equus

Well the questions I have I would not hesitate to post to a Christian, a Jew, a Jannist or any other religeon. But I just know as soon as I were to post the same it would not be recieved well at all. I would immediately be condemned as anti-Islamic, of have another agenda other than an honest discussion. That this is unique to Islam strikes me as though we are all having to be way beyond respectful, which of course we should be, but infact we have to handle Islamic issues with oven gloves on. This strikes me as wrong.
Most of you will know I am an athiest, I have no agenda to push, yet I remain captivated by the origins, history and nuances of all faiths. Its just sad that I feel unable to engage in some questions I have, and I note that no-one else has risked the same, so I am unable to get anything that way. It's almost like CR is a corridor of doors, each leading to a faith, but the door marked Islam is securely locked and surrounded by balls of razor-wire. Its so much a reflection of the times I supose.



I should maybe have used the word discuss and not debate, there is a difference. but would there be a difference once a question was asked? I have no need or urge to proselityse for any camp including my own flavour of atheism. But in discussion with people you can get insights that are not found any other way.



david

I can relate to what you're saying, some issues are very sensitive and/or controversial when it comes to discussing them with Muslims. I remember throwing accusations at Paul (formerly Saul of Tarsus) one day and the Christian I was talking with decided to "turn the tables" on me so to speak and threw some accusations at Muhammad (just to illustrate a point). I got pretty heated when that happened, lol, but I've grown since then.

[Devadatta]

Originally Posted by Tao_Equus

I have recently been researching on the topic of Muhammads' life and the origins of Islam. I find myself with many questions I would like to debate but find that I am reluctant and unsure how to go about this without offending Muslims. Do others here feel this same 'intimidation', for thats what I feel it to be, and find like me that this is unique to Islam?

As Bruce has already pointed out, Christians also have their hot buttons. But of course you’re right that not all traditions are equally “hot” – and take this from someone prone to pushing buttons.

Historically, Christians & Muslims have been the hottest, for the simple reason that these two traditions were unique as religions of conversion claiming exclusive ownership of the absolute truth. As someone said on the Muslim board, if you believe that ignoring this truth leads to eternal damnation then it’s your duty to aggressively proselytize others (Christianity) or aggressively defend your own (Islam).

Christianity still has its aggressive types, but it’s currently cooler than Islam for several reasons.

First, as Brian rightly points out, there was the Reformation and the rise of the spirit of free inquiry in Europe & the West. I would say most Christians outside the most extreme fringes are habituated to a culture of inquiry and so have a higher tolerance for self-examination. I can’t help noticing, for example, that in discussions on the Islam board Muslims not only tend not to want to give personal perspectives on issues, they take positive pride in only quoting authority. It’s hard – even for a non-Muslim more diplomatic than me – to have what we with a “Western” mentality would call a straightforward, person-to-person conversation. Often the result are discussions that never really happen or happen at cross-purposes.

Second, not having undergone anything analogous to a Reformation, Islam retains in its mainstream features that have become marginal among Christians, attitudes toward apostasy, for example, and hot language drawing down curses, etc., on their opponents. Pre-Reformation, this mindset would have seemed perfectly normal to most Christians. Now, it seems decidedly “hot’.

Third, Islam in general is flavoured by the lack of development and social disarray in many Muslim countries. Muslims are correct that they shouldn’t be judged by the extremists, by ranting clerics in Afghanistan or practices like female genital mutilation in Africa. But I think these concrete social conditions drag down the tenor of discourse for Islam as a whole, especially because the felt need to protect the ummah, and the sense of historical grievance, leads even moderate Muslims to defend or at least pass over in silence many of these abuses.

Finally, there is the fact that Islam itself is in a unique state of crisis. Whatever you may say about the problems of other traditions, no faith is contested the way Islam is in its relationship to the contemporary world, its political mandate and most importantly in its justification for the use of violence to attain political ends. Unfortunately – if understandably – the reaction of many Muslims is to retreat further into their tradition as self-defence, on the principle that their problems are rooted not in Islam but in not being Islamic enough. In any case, fierce Muslim pride deeply resents outsiders, especially loose canons like me, offering any prescriptions or criticisms.

So, yes, I would agree that it’s not your imagination. Under present historical conditions, Islam is definitely a special & sensitive case.

Sincerely,
Devadatta

[Tao_Equus]

Originally Posted by wil

Again it appears with anything, discussing nuances and intracies of something we have common ground on is one thing...

But if one percieves that your questions or discussions are digging at the foundations of their faith that is quite another..

I answered already on some other thread today, are the foundations so weak as to not withstand discussion?


regards

david

[Tao_Equus]

Originally Posted by aburaees

I can relate to what you're saying, some issues are very sensitive and/or controversial when it comes to discussing them with Muslims. I remember throwing accusations at Paul (formerly Saul of Tarsus) one day and the Christian I was talking with decided to "turn the tables" on me so to speak and threw some accusations at Muhammad (just to illustrate a point). I got pretty heated when that happened, lol, but I've grown since then.

Well thats how we truly learn, IMHO. I have had my words thrown back at me several times now on these pages. And enjoyed the experience in every case


Thanks for your reply

david

[Tao_Equus]

Devadatta thank you for your post and for your support on this question. Thank you also for reminding me that its not worth the effort in trying to engage in any debate when all I will get in return are cut and pastes. And perhaps for reminding me that tolerance in the face of intolerance is sometimes ones only rational option.

Kind regards

david

[flowperson]

I am interested in the origins of religious movements, and almost universally they begin with the founder having some sort of mystical experience.

For the Gautama it was what happened while he was doing some princely meditations under a tree.
Muhammad had his experiences while he was meditating in a cave in the hills.
While we are not told of any one mystical experience that Jesus had, I guess you could say that his entire life was a mystical experience if one believes the cannon.
Moses had his on a mountain when a burning bush spoke to him.
Paul, whose evangelizing and writing did a great deal to popularize the early Christian movement had his mystical moment on the road to Damascus.
Your namesake religion, Taoism, didn't start with a mystical moment according to legend. Rather Lao Tsu had to write down the Tao Te Ching as a toll payment for being allowed by a gatekeeper to cross the border from China into Mongolia on his beast.
Joseph Smith, a former Congregationalist living near the Erie Canal, was shown some golden plates in a vision. He later dug them up, along with some bow-shaped silver artifacts, on Mt.Cumorah, took them home, and translated them by himself them into the Book of Mormon which effectively started that religion.

In almost each instance the origin point had something to do with one person touching, or being touched by, some sort of alternative reality which inspired great works.
Magic? Creative quantum manipulation? G-d at work? No one knows, but each instance changed the world. The problems that happened after the initial instances were all caused when other humans were brought into the situation. Ask Salman Rushdie. He knows alot about this.

There was an excellent book about these sorts of processes written by Mircea Eliade in the 50's or 60's titled, I believe, The Sacred and the Profane. I found it to be very enlightening.

flow....

[Devadatta]

Originally Posted by flowperson

While we are not told of any one mystical experience that Jesus had, I guess you could say that his entire life was a mystical experience if one believes the cannon.

Your namesake religion, Taoism, didn't start with a mystical moment according to legend. Rather Lao Tsu had to write down the Tao Te Ching as a toll payment for being allowed by a gatekeeper to cross the border from China into Mongolia on his beast.

There was an excellent book about these sorts of processes written by Mircea Eliade in the 50's or 60's titled, I believe, The Sacred and the Profane. I found it to be very enlightening.flow....

- I guess there are two main candidates for the birth of God consciousness in Jesus: his forty days in the desert, and his baptism by John with the descent of the dove.

- I believe that according to modern scholarship, Lao Tze was not an actual person but only an ideal type, attached to an anthology of taoist sayings. Chuang-tse, on the other hand, may very well have existed, since scholars detect an authentically individual voice.

- It's been a long time, but I remember reading a book by Mircea Eliade on shamanism. Have to respect his ambition to respectfully synthesize religious experience across all conditions.

Sincerely,
Devadatta

[flowperson]

Devadatta.

Thanks for your response. I guess my point was that these things, religious movements, get started by an individual under mysterious and hidden circumstances, and they don't become controversial until others are brought into the movement. Humans being what they are....

I would also suggest the Forge and the Crucible by Eliade. Thanks again.

flow....

[Devadatta]

Originally Posted by flowperson

Devadatta.

Thanks for your response. I guess my point was that these things, religious movements, get started by an individual under mysterious and hidden circumstances, and they don't become controversial until others are brought into the movement. Humans being what they are....

I would also suggest the Forge and the Crucible by Eliade. Thanks again.

flow....

Point taken. And I agree. I was only adding some supplements.

Sincerely,
Devadatta

[Tao_Equus]

All very true Flow, and any Prophet today would immediately be diagnosed as schitzophrenic and put on mind sapping medication.


Regards

david